Addendum Two .pdf

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY

DEPARTMENT FOR FACILITIES AND SUPPORT SERVICES

DIVISION OF ENGINEERING AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION

INVITATION TO BID NO: RFB-168-25

FOR: Maintenance Facility & Salt Structure

Whitley County- District 11 Kentucky Transportation Cabinet Williamsburg, Kentucky

DATE: January 30, 2025

RFB-785-2500000395

ADDENDUM NO. Two (2)

BIDDER SHALL CONFORM TO THE FOLLOWING CHANGES AS SAME SHALL BECOME BINDING

UPON THE CONTRACT TO BE ISSUED IN RESPONSE TO THIS INVITATION TO BID.

Item 1: Refer to addendum to be distributed by Lynn Imaging for all additions, deletions, and/or changes to specifications and/or drawings.

END OF ADDENDUM

Invitation to Bid No. RFB-168-25 For: Maintenance Facility & Salt Structure

Whitley County- District 11 Kentucky Transportation Cabinet Williamsburg, Kentucky

Susan Ward, Statewide Procurement Analyst II Division of Engineering and Contract Administration

Addendum 02

K Y T C – C o n s t r u c t W h i t l e y C o u n t y M a i n t e n a n c e / S e c t i o n O f f i c e District 11 - Whitley County, Kentucky Engineering File #: 609-C9R4-Z001-A35 Request For Bid #: RFB-168-25

Addendum 02 Date: 30 January 2025

THE BIDDING AND GENERAL DOCUMENTS, NOTES, AND DRAWINGS ARE CLARIFIED OR CHANGED IN

ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING. THE BIDDERS SHALL ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF THIS

ADDENDUM ON THE PROPOSAL FORM IN THE SPACE PROVIDED.

GENERAL I TEMS:

A2.1 See attached Preliminary Geotechnical Report of Investigation by American Engineers, dated

November 2022 – This Report was created shortly after the property was purchased – The newer CSI report (Addendum 01) was created once the building locations were established.

E N D O F A D D E N D U M 0 2

WHITLEY COUNTY, KENTUCKY

NOVEMBER 2022

DIVISION OF ENGINEERING &

CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION

WHITLEY COUNTY MAINTENANCE FACILITY

November 21, 2022

Mr. Joe Sandman, Architect Project Manager Division of Engineering and Contract Administration Commonwealth of Kentucky 403 Wapping Street Frankfort, Kentucky 40601 Re: Preliminary Report of Geotechnical Exploration

Whitley County Maintenance Facility Whitley County, Kentucky AEI Project No. 222-270

Dear Mr. Sandman:

American Engineers, Inc. is pleased to submit this preliminary geotechnical report that details the results of our geotechnical exploration performed at the above referenced site.

The attached report describes the site and subsurface conditions and also details our recommendations for the proposed project. The Appendices to the report contains a drawing with a boring layout, typed boring logs, the results of laboratory testing, and pictures of the recovered rock core.

We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project and hope to provide further support on this and other projects in the future. Please contact us if you have any questions regarding this report.

Respectfully, AMERICAN ENGINEERS, INC.

Katy Bridges, EIT Geotechnical Engineer

Dusty Barrett, PE, PMP Director of Geotechnical Services i

PRELIMINARY REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION

WHITLEY COUNTY MAINTENANCE FACILITY

WHITLEY COUNTY, KENTUCKY

Table of Contents

1 GENERAL SITE DESCRIPTION

2 GENERAL SITE GEOLOGY

3 SCOPE OF WORK PERFORMED

4 RESULTS OF THE EXPLORATION

4.1 GENERAL

4.2 SUBSURFACE SOIL CONDITIONS

4.3 BEDROCK CONDITIONS

4.4 GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS

4.5 SEISMIC CONDITIONS

5 ANALYSES AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 GENERAL

5.2 SITE GRADING

5.2.1 Topsoil Stripping

5.2.2 On-Site Soils

5.2.3 General Fill Requirements

5.2.4 Off-Site Soils

5.2.5 Rock Removal

5.2.6 Subgrade Evaluation/Conditioning

5.2.7 Fill Placement

5.2.8 Soil Movement

5.2.9 Site Soil Practices

5.3 STRUCTURE FOUNDATIONS

5.3.1 Recommended Bearing Capacity Values

5.3.2 Pile Placement Recommendations

5.3.3 Rock Bearing Considerations

5.3.4 Recommended Minimum Footing Dimensions

5.3.5 Footing Trenches

5.3.6 Grade Supported Floor Slab Recommendations

5.4 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

5.4.1 Construction Monitoring/Testing

ii

5.4.2 Earthwork Considerations

5.4.3 Limitations

Appendices

Appendix A – Boring Layout

Appendix B – Boring Logs

Appendix C – Laboratory Testing Results

Appendix D – Rock Core Sample Pictures

PRELIMINARY REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION

WHITLEY COUNTY MAINTENANCE FACILITY

WHITLEY COUNTY, KENTUCKY

1 GENERAL SITE DESCRIPTION

The site of the proposed maintenance facilities is located southwest of the intersection of I-75 and the Cumberland Falls Highway in Whitley County, Kentucky. At the time of the investigation, the site had been used as a dump site for fill material and was partially overlain with crushed aggregate and mine spoil. The remaining portions of the site consisted of grassy and wooded areas. Topographic relief can best be described as gently rolling.

It is our understanding that the area investigated is to be considered for the site of a new maintenance facility, salt dome, and engineering office. Anticipated loading conditions for the proposed facilities and a grading plan were not available at the time of this investigation.

2 GENERAL SITE GEOLOGY

Available geologic mapping (Geologic Map of the Wofford Quadrangle, Whitley County, Kentucky, KGS, 1967, and the Kentucky Geological Survey Geologic Map Information Service online) shows the site to be underlain by lower to middle Pennsylvanian-aged deposits of the Breathitt Formation. Mapping describes the Breathitt Formation as consisting primarily of sandstone, shale, siltstone and coal. The sandstone is described as silty and clayey, medium to dark gray in color, fine to medium grained, thick bedded and crossbedded in part, intertounging with shale, micaceous, and carbonaceous in part. The shale is described as sandy, yellowish gray to black in color, compact, containing ironstone concretions, micaceous, and carbonaceous in part. The siltstone is described as shaly, gray in color, weathered and fractured. The Jellico Coal bed is also noted to be prevalent in the area with an average thickness of 24 inches.

An active gas well (Record No. 71200) is located at Coordinates 36.787865, -84.167656 with a surface elevation of 1096 feet, which is located approximately 700 feet southwest of the proposed site.

The site is situated above the Jellico, Blue Gem, and River Gem coal beds. A coal boring was performed at Coordinates 36.784981, -84.16974, which is located approximately 18 feet southwest of the proposed site, indicating a 27-inch coal bed near Elevation 1080 feet. Mapping does not indicate the presence of mine shafts or strip mining within the proposed footprint. Aerial imaging indicates that the site topography has been continuously modified since 2004. We expect that mine spoil was used to level the site.

There are potential hazards associated with construction in areas proximate to mine operations. Collapse of mine shafts or consolidation and degradation of loosely placed mine spoil may occur. In addition, geologic mapping indicates the presence of several strip mines within one mile south of the site. No other geologic hazards were readily apparent at the time of the investigation. It is impossible to fully identify the presence or potential for the development of all geologic hazards during the course of a typical geotechnical investigation.

3 SCOPE OF WORK PERFORMED

The preliminary geotechnical exploration consisted of drilling seven soil test borings within the proposed development area. Each soil test boring was advanced to auger refusal. Rock coring was performed in Borings B-2 and B-6 and extended 38 and 20 feet, respectively, beneath the auger refusal depths. The boring locations, except for Boring B-4, were elevated by KYTC District 11 personnel. A boring layout is included in Appendix A of this report.

The borings were drilled by an AEI drill crew using a track-mounted drill rig equipped with continuous flight hollow-stem augers. An Engineering Technician was on site throughout the fieldwork to log the recovered soils encountered during the drilling operation. During logging, particular attention was given to the soil color, texture, consistency and apparent moisture content. Standard Penetration Tests (SPT’s) were performed on two and one-half foot centers in the upper ten feet and on five-foot centers, thereafter. Undisturbed Shelby tube samples were obtained at selected depth intervals. All borings were advanced to auger refusal. Soil samples were collected and stored in sealed plastic bags to be transported back to our laboratory for further analysis. The individual soil samples were visually classified by experienced laboratory technicians and verified by a Geotechnical Engineer based on texture, strength and plasticity.

The natural moisture content was determined in the laboratory along with Atterberg limits and unconfined compressive strength testing. The results of the laboratory tests are included in Appendix C.

The soils were classified in the laboratory in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). The Unified symbol for each stratum is shown on the legend for the graphical boring logs. The testing was performed in accordance with the generally accepted standards for such tests.

4 RESULTS OF THE EXPLORATION

4.1 GENERAL

Information provided in the Appendices for this report includes boring locations, results of the laboratory tests and other relevant geotechnical information. A description of the subsurface soil, bedrock and groundwater conditions follows.

4.2 SUBSURFACE SOIL CONDITIONS

The generalized subsurface conditions encountered at the boring locations, including descriptions of the various strata and their depths and thicknesses are presented on the Boring Logs in Appendix B.

The stratification shown on the boring logs is based on the field and laboratory data acquired during this exploration. The change in soil from one type to another shown at specific depths on the logs is, in general, not intended to indicate a zone of exact change but rather the general area of change from one soil type to another; in-situ, the transition is gradual.

In Borings B-1, B-2 and B-3, crushed aggregate was encountered at the immediate ground surface with thickness ranging from four to seven inches. Fill material was encountered at the immediate ground surface in the remaining borings and was encountered to the auger refusal depths in each boring across the site. The fill was typically described as mine spoil consisting primarily of lean clay, sand, crushed aggregate, concrete, wood and brick construction debris, and rubbilized shale, coal and sandstone. The spoil materials are described as dark brown to black in color, damp to wet, medium stiff to hard in soil strength consistency, and loose to very dense in relative soil density.

SPT-N values in the predominantly cohesive mine spoil at the site ranged from four to 35 blows per foot (bpf), excluding 50+ blow counts. Corresponding Qp values ranged from

0.5 to greater than 4.5 tons per square foot (tsf), with most values ranging from 2.25 to greater than 4.5 tsf. Together, the SPT-N and Qp values are generally indicative of medium stiff to very stiff soil strength consistencies with isolated hard zones.

SPT-N values in the predominantly granular mine spoil at the site ranged from three to 35 blows per foot (bpf), excluding 50+ blow counts, which indicate soils with loose to very dense relative soil densities.

Atterberg limits testing was performed on representative near-surface samples with the results indicating that the soils classify as CL (Clay of Low plasticity), lean clay and SP (Poorly Graded Sand) in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS).

Test results ranging from 29 to 46 percent for liquid limit values were obtained with corresponding plasticity indices ranging from 10 to 23 percent. Natural moisture contents of the clay soils ranged from six to 20 percent with most values ranging from six to 12 percent. Typically, the soils were near to 11 percent dry of the plastic limit.

4.3 BEDROCK CONDITIONS

Refusal, as would be indicated by the Driller on the field boring logs, indicates a depth where either essentially no downward progress can be made by the auger. It is normally indicative of a very hard or very dense material such as large boulders or the upper bedrock surface or where the N-value indicates essentially no penetration of the split-spoon sampler. At this site, auger refusal was encountered in all borings with depths ranging from about 1.0 to 15.4 feet beneath the existing ground surface. Auger refusal depths are summarized in the table below.

Table 1: Summary of Auger Refusal Depths

Boring Number

Refusal Depth (feet)

Refusal Elevation (feet)

Top of Rock Depth

(feet)

Top of Rock Elevation

(feet) B-1 3.5 1112.2 -- -- B-2 11.0 1101.9 29.7 1083.2 B-3 15.1 1097.7 -- -- B-4 12.0 1094.0* -- -- B-5 15.4 1094.1 9.0 1100.5 B-6 1.0 1069.0 1.0 1069.0 B-7 2.8 1067.2 -- --

*Elevations for Boring B-4 are approximate.

It is impossible to determine the exact top of relatively unweathered bedrock without performing rock coring, which was only performed in Borings B-2 and B-6. It is anticipated that the auger refusal depths encountered in the remaining borings are not indicative of the bedrock surface and are likely due to the obstructing mine spoil material overlaying the site.

Rock coring was performed in Borings B-2 and B-6 and extended to depths of 38 and 20 feet, respectively, beyond the auger refusal depths shown in Table 1. The recovered rock core was typically described as shale and sandstone. The shale was described as containing coal partings, tan to black in color, arenaceous, silty, laminated to thinly bedded, soft to moderately hard, decomposed to moderately weathered, micaceous, carbonaceous in part, and containing iron oxide nodules. The sandstone was described as containing shale and coal partings, tan to gray in color, fine to medium grained, thinly bedded, moderately hard to hard, moderately to highly weathered, micaceous, cross bedded in part, and with rust staining along joints. Highly weathered to decomposed shale was also encountered prior to auger refusal in Boring B-5 and was described as dark gray to brown in color, arenaceous, soft, and laminated.

Rock core recovery percentages ranged from zero to 100 percent, with most values ranging from 80 to 100 percent. Rock Quality Designation (RQD) percentages ranged from zero to 78 percent, with most values ranging between zero and 29 percent.

4.4 GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS

Groundwater was not encountered in any of the borings during the investigation. In cohesive soils such as those encountered at the site, a long time is required for the hydrostatic groundwater level to come to equilibrium in the borehole. The short-term groundwater levels reported by the drill crew are not generally indicative of the long-term groundwater level. To accurately determine the long-term groundwater level, as well as the seasonal and precipitation induced fluctuations of the groundwater level, it is necessary to install piezometers in the borings, and monitor them for an extended length of time. Frequently, groundwater conditions affecting construction in this region are caused by trapped or perched groundwater, which occurs within the soil materials or at the soil/rock interface in irregular, discontinuous locations. If these water bodies are encountered during excavation, they can produce seepage durations and rates that will vary depending on the recent rainfall activity and the hydraulic conductivity of the material.

4.5 SEISMIC CONDITIONS

According to the Kentucky Building Code, 2018 Edition and the subsurface conditions encountered in the borings, Site Class D should be utilized for any seismic structural design for foundations bearing on mine spoil. Site Class C may be utilized for any structure designed for foundations bearing on competent bedrock.

The seismic site class may be improved for individual structures once a final development plan is available and additional borings are performed for specific planned structures.

Consideration for seismic loading and liquefaction potential beyond this level of investigation is left to the discretion of the structural and foundation design engineer.

5 ANALYSES AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The recommendations that follow are based on our conceptual understanding of the project. As the site design is advanced, please notify us of any significant design changes so that our recommendations can be reviewed and modified as necessary.

5.1 GENERAL

Mine spoil was encountered across the site at the immediate ground surface. The mine spoil consisted primarily of rubbilized shale, coal, and sandstone, lean clay, crushed aggregate, construction debris such as brick and concrete, and organic matter. It should be noted that mine spoil is subject to degradation and differential settlement over time.

Total settlement and areas of degradation are unpredictable.

The recovered rock core and split spoon samples revealed relatively unweathered bedrock that was encountered at the depths included in Table 2 below.

Table 2: Summary of Bedrock Elevations

Boring Number

Refusal Depth (feet)

Depth to Top of Rock

(feet)

Top of Rock Elevation

(feet) B-2 11.0 29.7 1083.2 B-5 15.4 9.0 1100.5 B-6 1.0 1.0 1069.0

The varying depths to unweathered bedrock may present challenges in creating a uniform bearing surface and may require over-excavation and replacement with engineered fill, rock removal, deep foundations, mat foundations, or a combination of all four depending on the anticipated structural loading conditions and location of the structure.

Recommendations for thickened mat foundations bearing on mine spoil and pre-drilled H-piles bearing on rock are provided in Section 5.3 of this report. It should be understood by the owner that any structure bearing on mine spoil should be designed to withstand unpredictable amounts of differential settlement. Structures that cannot be designed to withstand differential settlement should be designed to bear entirely on competent bedrock.

5.2 SITE GRADING

5.2.1 Topsoil Stripping

Prior to earthwork operations, topsoil and surface plant material root mat should be stripped from both cut and fill areas and stockpiled for landscaping purposes.

5.2.2 On-Site Soils

The near-surface soils on this site consist of mine spoil material described as clay, sand and gravel classified as low to moderate plasticity lean clay, CL, poorly graded silty sand, SP-SM, and poorly graded silty gravel, GP-GM in accordance with the USCS. Construction debris, weathered rock and organic matter was encountered to the auger refusal depths in each of the borings. Efforts should be made to schedule earthwork activities during the late spring to early fall months since these materials will pump, rut and lose strength with moisture contents more than several points wet or dry of the optimum moisture content for compaction.

5.2.3 General Fill Requirements

Any material, whether borrowed on-site or imported to the site, placed as engineered fill on the project site beneath the proposed building or other proposed on-grade structures such as pavement, parking lots, sidewalks, etc., should be an approved material, free of environmental contamination, vegetation, topsoil, organic material, wet soil, construction debris, and rock fragments greater than six inches in diameter. We recommend that any borrow material, if needed, consist of granular or lean clay materials or mixtures thereof with Unified Classifications of CL, SC, or GC. We further recommend high plasticity clays, known as fat clays (CH soils) not be imported to the site due to their potential for volume changes with fluctuations in moisture content.

The preferred borrow material should have a Plasticity Index (PI) less than 30 and a standard Proctor maximum dry density of at least 95 pcf. Engineering classification and standard Proctor tests should be performed on all potential borrow soils and the test results evaluated by an AEI Geotechnical Engineer to evaluate the suitability of the soil for use as engineered fill.

5.2.4 Off-Site Soils

If off-site material is needed, it should meet the requirements specified in Section 5.1.3 above.

5.2.5 Rock Removal

A grading plan with finished floor elevations was not provided at the time of this investigation. However, it is anticipated that rock removal may be required for excavations of the proposed building foundations in areas near Borings B-1, B-6, and B-7. Excavations which extend below the bedrock surface can be excavated vertically.

Prolonged exposure should be prevented. Rock removal in these areas as described above should be performed by hoe-ramming or other mechanical efforts.

5.2.6 Subgrade Evaluation/Conditioning

Once the topsoil is removed, areas to receive fill should be “proof-rolled” under the observation of an AEI Geotechnical Engineer or Engineering Technician to evaluate the subgrade for suitability for fill placement. The proof-rolling should be performed using heavy construction equipment such as a fully loaded triaxle dump truck (approximately 40 tons), passing repeatedly over the subgrade at a slow rate of speed.

Subgrade soils that are considered unstable after proof-rolling should be stabilized by additional compaction or by one or more of the following methods: in-place stabilization using chemical methods (soil cement), removal and replacement with engineered fill, partial depth removal and replacement with a crushed (angular) aggregate layer, or partial depth removal and replacement with a geogrid and a crushed aggregate layer. The specific method of treatment will be based on the conditions present at the time the proof-rolling is performed and local availability of materials and economic factors. The selection of the appropriate method to mitigate degrading subgrade soils is dependent on the time of year site work is anticipated, cost, anticipated effectiveness, and scheduling impacts. AEI can assist in selecting this method considering all factors.

Once the subgrade is judged to be relatively uniform and suitable for support of engineered fill, fill areas should be brought to design elevations with onsite soil and/or suitable off-site borrow material placed and compacted as specified in Section 5.1.7 Fill Placement.

5.2.7 Fill Placement

Lean clay, CL, soil placed under building areas should be placed in maximum eight inch (loose thickness) horizontal lifts, with each lift being compacted to a minimum of 98 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density, at a moisture content within two percent of optimum. The compaction requirement may be reduced to 95 percent in proposed paved areas and to 92 percent in proposed landscape areas. Based on the results of moisture content tests performed in the borings, drying of the on-site soils will be necessary to achieve moisture contents suitable for compaction. Representative and adequate field density testing should be performed by AEI to verify that compaction requirements have been met.

5.2.8 Soil Movement

Site grading should be maintained during construction so that positive drainage is promoted at all times. Final site grading should be accomplished in such a manner as to divert surface runoff and roof drains away from the foundation elements and paved areas. Precipitation runoff should be collected in storm sewers as quickly as possible.

Maintenance should be performed regularly on paved areas to seal pavement cracks and reduce surface water infiltration into the pavement subgrade.

5.2.9 Site Soil Practices

Working with the on-site soils will demand sensible construction practices and techniques. Some of these include:

• Prevent stripping too far in advance of actual earthwork needs. Problems arise when broad areas of clay/silt mixtures are exposed and allowed to become wet and soft from rainfall. Once saturated, deep rutting can occur by movement of construction equipment.

• Strip areas to receive fill in small, sequential areas as needed. These areas should be limited to the contractor’s abilities to reasonably place and compact fill material.

• Schedule earthwork construction to take full advantage of a summer season.

Generally, the on-site clays need to be placed at two percent wet of optimum moisture content to achieve compaction and reduce the potential for subgrade volume change. This moisture range is difficult to achieve in the winter and early spring when rainfall activity is more prevalent and soil drying is not always possible.

• Maintain good surface drainage during earthwork construction. Grade construction areas on a daily basis if necessary to promote sheet drainage of precipitation and seal all engineered fill placed with a smooth drum steel roller at the end of each day.

• Perform frequent density tests during fill placement to confirm achievement of proper compaction.

5.3 STRUCTURE FOUNDATIONS

5.3.1 Recommended Bearing Capacity Values

Foundations for individual structures should be designed to bear entirely on soil or entirely on bedrock and not a combination of both to minimize the potential for differential settlement. Moreover, if a soil bearing foundation system is utilized, at least two feet of soil should be present below the footing bearing elevation.

A thickened mat foundation can be utilized to bear on the mine spoil. The owner should understand that this method may experience differential settlement across the building.

The mat foundation should include reinforcing steel and should be a minimum thickness of three feet. A pre-engineered metal building would be less sensitive to differential movement if this type of structure is an option. It is impossible to estimate the potential settlement of a heterogenous material such as mine spoil. Foundations bearing on unstabilized soil using a mat foundation should be designed using an allowable bearing capacity of 1,500 psf.

As an alternative to a thickened mat foundation, a combination of thickened strip footings and pre-drilled H-Piles bearing on rock may be used. It is recommended that the thickened strip footings should serve as a grade beam to distribute the structural loads to the pre-drilled H-piles. Pre-drilling is required to confirm the H-pile bears on competent bedrock and not mine spoil boulders as encountered in Boring B-2. We recommend a resistance factor (φc) of 0.5 to determine the maximum nominal resistance of the pre-drilled piles due to the anticipated difficult driving conditions on site. Pile placement should follow the recommendations outlined in Section 5.2.2 of this report.

A rock bearing foundation may be required due to the relatively shallow depths to bedrock near borings B-1, B-6 and B-7. An allowable bearing capacity of 5,000 psf may be used for foundations designed to bear on competent sandstone or shale bedrock or properly placed lean concrete fill in contact with the bedrock surface.

It should be noted that the Jellico, Blue Gem, and River Gem coal beds may underly the site. Rock bearing continuous wall footings, isolated spread footings or pre-drilled H-piles should not bear on coal. If coal is encountered during pre-drilling or foundation excavations, full depth removal and replacement along the bearing surface is recommended. If over excavation is required for rock bearing continuous and isolated spread footings, the additional excavation may be backfilled with properly placed lean concrete in contact with the bedrock surface.

The design bearing capacity may be improved for specific structures once final building locations are established and additional borings are performed during a final geotechnical investigation for any specific structures.

These recommendations are provided in consideration of the field-testing, laboratory testing, local codes, and our experience with materials of similar description.

5.3.2 Pile Placement Recommendations

Pile placement should follow these recommendations:

• A hammer with a rated energy below 20 kip-ft will be required to confirm practical refusal without damaging the pile. The contractor shall submit the proposed pile driving system to the engineer for approval prior to the installation of the first pile. Approval of the pile driving system by the Engineer will be subject to satisfactory field performance of the pile driving procedures. Temporary shoring methods may be required to facilitate foundation construction.

• Piles should be placed in pre-drilled borings after the borings are backfilled with pea gravel or high slump concrete. Use a small energy hammer, 20 kip-feet or less, to confirm practical refusal without damaging the pile.

• For determining practical refusal for point-bearing steel H-Piles, we recommend using Case-1, refusal into sound, hard rock.

• The AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications recommend a resistance factor for horizontal geotechnical resistance of a single pile or pile group of 1.0 for lateral capacity analyses.

• A plan note should be included by the designer to address pre-drilling for piles to the bearing elevations. Where pre-drilling is necessary for pile installation, holes shall be drilled into solid rock. A temporary casing may be required to prevent collapse of the hole. If used, remove the casing as the hole is being backfilled.

5.3.3 Rock Bearing Considerations

The shale and sandstone encountered at this site is highly susceptible to degradation when exposed to moisture. We anticipate that any exposed shale or sandstone will degrade significantly during construction. If at all possible, avoid exposing the bearing surface of the bedrock until absolutely necessary. We would also suggest that if rock excavation is required to reach the design bearing elevation that the bedrock should be left unexcavated approximately one foot above the design bearing elevation. Once the entire foundation is ready for concrete forming the one-foot cap should be removed to achieve the design bearing elevation. An AEI representative should be onsite throughout foundation construction to verify the bearing surface. If weathered bedrock requires removal below the anticipated bearing elevation, dense graded aggregate (DGA) or lean concrete can be utilized to fill the additional excavation and achieve the appropriate bearing elevation.

5.3.4 Recommended Minimum Footing Dimensions

The minimum recommended width of continuous wall footings is 18 inches. The minimum recommended plan dimension for isolated spread footings is 24 inches. Actual foundation sizes should be determined by the foundation engineer based on design structure loads and the net allowable bearing value presented in 5.2.1.

5.3.5 Footing Trenches

Foundation construction should follow these recommendations:

• Foundation concrete should be placed in the excavations the same day the trenches are cut.

• Exposed bearing surfaces should be protected from severe drying, freezing, and water accumulation. A concrete “mud-mat” may be constructed over the bearing materials if the excavation must remain exposed to the elements for an extended period of time.

• Any loose soil, debris, or excess water should be removed from the bearing surface prior to concrete placement.

• The foundation-bearing surface should be level or appropriately benched.

• Foundation materials that have deteriorated as a result of the elements should be removed prior to concrete placement.

• Foundation trenches should be “clean-cut” where possible and constructed without the use of forms.

• Reinforcing steel should be placed in all footings to provide strength to distribute loads on the foundation that may be overlying weak or more compressible foundation materials to stronger adjacent materials.

5.3.6 Grade Supported Floor Slab Recommendations

If a thickened mat foundation is utilized, we have estimated an Effective Modulus of Soil Subgrade Reaction (k) of 200 pci.

If pre-drilled H-pile and thickened strip footing foundation system is utilized, we recommend supporting the floor slabs with rock-bearing, deep foundations. The slab should be of appropriate thickness and contain adequate reinforcement to span between deep foundation elements. Refer to Sections 5.2.1 and 5.2.2 for additional deep foundation recommendations.

The final floor slab design, including the amount of and type of steel reinforcement (welded wire mesh or bar reinforcing) will be dependent on the structural engineer’s evaluation of the final grade slab thickness, concrete compressive strength, and actual slab loadings. Additional design and construction recommendations are provided as follows:

• Proof-rolling of the cut subgrade and existing subgrade should be performed to identify soft or unstable soil prior to engineered fill placement. Soft soils should be removed to the extent determined in the field by the AEI Geotechnical Engineer or Technician. Proof-rolling of the final floor slab subgrade should also be performed prior to floor slab construction and any defects appropriately repaired as recommended in the field by AEI.

• The floor slab should be supported on a minimum 6-inch compacted layer of free draining granular base material to distribute concentrated loads, improve drainage, and reduce the risk of deterioration of the prepared subgrade during construction.

The stone should be kept moist not wet, immediately before placement of concrete to limit differential curing conditions at the top and bottom of the slab.

• Typically, a vapor barrier is recommended to prevent water vapor transmissions that normally have the potential to adversely affect the floor coverings ability to bond to the slab. Recommendations from ACI 302.1 R 96, “Guide for Concrete Floor and Slab Construction”, should be utilized. Joints between slab sections should contain keys or dowels to permit slab rotation but to reduce extreme vertical differential displacements.

5.4 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

5.4.1 Construction Monitoring/Testing

Field density and moisture content determinations should be made on each lift of fill with a minimum of one test per 3,000 to 5,000 square feet in building pad areas, one test per lift per 5,000 to 10,000 square feet in other fill areas, and one test per lift per 100 to 200 linear feet of utility trench backfill. All construction operations involving earthwork and paving should be performed in the presence of an experienced representative of AEI. The representative would operate under the direct supervision of an AEI Geotechnical Engineer. Some adjustments in the test frequencies may be required based upon the general fill types, changes in the fill material and soil conditions at the time of placement.

Site problems can be avoided or reduced if proper field observation and testing services are provided. We recommend all foundation excavations, proof-rolling, site and subgrade preparation, subgrade stabilization (if used), and pavement construction be monitored by AEI. Density tests should be performed to verify compaction and moisture content for all earthwork operations. Field observations should be performed prior to and during concrete placement operations.

5.4.2 Earthwork Considerations

The surface soils at the site are susceptible to loss of bearing capacity (pumping) by the action of water and construction equipment. Once the subgrade has been stripped, cut to grade and passed a proof-roll, it should be sealed at the end of each filling day with a smooth drum roller and sloped to sheet drain rainwater. Any material disturbed by rainwater and construction operations should be undercut prior to placing the next lift of fill.

If the project is to begin in the fall and continue through the winter, care must be taken not to place frozen soil, as proper compaction will be impractical. Moisture contents must also be carefully monitored during the winter, as wet soil will be difficult to dry.

5.4.3 Limitations

The conclusions and recommendations presented herein are based on information gathered from the borings advanced during this exploration using that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised under similar circumstances by competent members of the engineering profession. No warranties can be made regarding the continuity of conditions between the borings. We will retain samples acquired for this project for a period of 30 days subsequent to the submittal date printed on the cover of this report.

After this period, the samples will be discarded unless otherwise requested.

APPENDIX A

Boring Layout

APPENDIX B

Boring Logs

FIELD TESTING PROCEDURES

The general field procedures employed by the Field Services Center are summarized in the following outline. The procedures utilized by the AEI Field Service Center are recognized methods for determining soil and rock distribution and ground water conditions. These methods include geophysical and in situ methods as well as borings.

Soil Borings are drilled to obtain subsurface samples using one of several alternate techniques depending upon the surface conditions. Borings are advanced into the ground using continuous flight augers. At prescribed intervals throughout the boring depths, soil samples are obtained with a split-spoon or thin-walled sampler and sealed in airtight glass jars and labeled. The sampler is first seated 6 inches to penetrate loose cuttings and then driven an additional foot, where possible, with blows from a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler each six-inch increment is recorded. The penetration resistance, or “N-value” is designated as the number of hammer blows required to drive the sampler the final foot and, when properly evaluated, is an index to cohesion for clays and relative density for sands. The split spoon sampling procedures used during the exploration are in general accordance with ASTM D 1586. Split spoon samples are considered to provide disturbed samples, yet are appropriate for most engineering applications.

Thin-walled (Shelby tube) samples are considered to provide undisturbed samples and obtained when warranted in general accordance with ASTM D 1587.

These drilling methods are not capable of penetrating through material designated as “refusal materials.” Refusal, thus indicated, may result from hard cemented soil, soft weathered rock, coarse gravel or boulders, thin rock seams, or the upper surface of sound continuous rock. Core drilling procedures are required to determine the character and continuity of refusal materials.

Core Drilling Procedures for use on refusal materials. Prior to coring, casing is set in the boring through the overburden soils. Refusal materials are then cored according to ASTM D-2113 using a diamond bit attached to the end of a hollow double tube core barrel. This device is rotated at high speeds and the cuttings are brought to the surface by circulating water. Samples of the material penetrated are protected and retained in the inner tube, which is retrieved at the end of each drill run.

Upon retrieval of the inner tube the core is recovered, measured and placed in boxes for storage.

The subsurface conditions encountered during drilling are reported on a field test boring record by the driller. The record contains information concerning the boring method, samples attempted and recovered, indications of the presence of various materials such as coarse gravel, cobbles, etc., and observations between samples. Therefore, these boring records contain both factual and interpretive information. The field boring records are on file in our office.

The soil and rock samples plus the field boring records are reviewed by a geotechnical engineer. The engineer classifies the soil in general accordance with the procedures outlined in ASTM D 2487 and D 2488 and prepares the final boring records which are the basis for all evaluations and recommendations.

Representative portions of soil samples are placed in sealed containers and transported to the laboratory. In the laboratory, the samples are examined to verify the driller’s field classifications.

Test Boring Records are attached which show the soil descriptions and penetration resistances.

The final boring records represent our interpretation of the contents of the field records based on the results of the engineering examinations and tests of the field samples. These records depict subsurface conditions at the specific locations and at the particular time when drilled. Soil conditions at other locations may differ from conditions occurring at these boring locations. Also, the passage of time may result in a change in the subsurface soil and ground water conditions at these boring locations. The lines designate the interface between soil or refusal materials on the records and on profiles represent approximate boundaries. The transition between materials may be gradual. The final boring records are included with this report.

Water table readings are normally taken in conjunction with borings and are recorded on the “Boring Logs”. These readings indicate the approximate location of the hydrostatic water table at the time of our field investigation. Where impervious soils are encountered (clayey soils) the amount of water seepage into the boring is small, and it is generally not possible to establish the location of hydrostatic water table through water level readings. The ground water table may also be dependent upon the amount of precipitation at the site during a particular period of time. Fluctuations in the water table should be expected with variations in precipitation, surface run-off, evaporation and other factors.

The time of boring water level reported on the boring records is determined by field crews as the drilling tools are advanced. The boring water level is detected by changes in the drilling rate, soil samples obtained, etc. Additional water table readings are generally obtained at least 24 hours after the borings are completed. The time lag of at least 24 hours is used to permit stabilization of the ground water table which has been disrupted by the drilling operations. The readings are taken by dropping a weighted line down the boring or using as electrical probe to detect the water level surface.

Occasionally the borings will cave-in, preventing water level readings from being obtained or trapping drilling water above the caved-in zone. The cave-in depth is also measured and recorded on the boring records.

Sampling Terminology

Undisturbed Sampling: Thin-walled or Shelby tube samples used for visual examination, classification tests and quantitative laboratory testing. This procedure is described by ASTM D 1587. Each tube, together with the encased soil, is carefully removed from the ground, made airtight and transported to the laboratory. Locations and depths of undisturbed samples are shown on the “Boring Logs.”

Bag Sampling: Bulk samples of soil are obtained at selected locations. These samples consist of soil brought to the surface by the drilling augers, or obtained from test pits or the ground surface using hand tools. Samples are placed in bags, with sealed jar samples of the material, and taken to our laboratory for testing where more mass material is required (i.e. Proctors and CBR’s). The locations of these samples are indicated on the appropriate logs, or on the Boring Location Plan.

T:\10 PROJECTS\210-000 Folder Template\Geotech\REPORTS\Class System.doc

CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM FOR SOIL EXPLORATION

COHESIVE SOILS

(Clay, Silt, and Mixtures)

CONSISTENCY SPT N-VALUE Qu/Qp (tsf) PLASTICITY

Very Soft 2 blows/ft or less 0 – 0.25 Degree of Plasticity Soft 2 to 4 blows/ft 0.25 – 0.49 Plasticity Index (PI) Medium Stiff 4 to 8 blows/ft 0.50 – 0.99 Low 0 – 7 Stiff 8 to 15 blows/ft 1.00 – 2.00 Medium 8 – 22 Very Stiff 15 to 30 blows/ft 2.00 – 4.00 High over 22 Hard 30 blows/ft or more > 4.00

NON-COHESIVE SOILS

(Silt, Sand, Gravel, and Mixtures)

DENSITY SPT N-VALUE PARTICLE SIZE IDENTIFICATION

Very Loose 4 blows/ft or less Boulders 12 inch diameter or more Loose 4 to 10 blows/ft Cobbles 3 to 12 inch diameter Medium Dense 10 to 30 blows/ft Gravel Coarse – 1 to 3 inch Dense 30 to 50 blows/ft Medium – ½ to 1 inch Very Dense 50 blows/ft or more Fine – ¼ to ½ inch Sand Coarse – 0.6mm to ¼ inch

RELATIVE PROPORTIONS Medium – 0.2mm to 0.6mm Descriptive Term Percent Trace 1 – 10 Fine – 0.05mm to 0.2mm Trace to Some 11 – 20 Some 21 – 35 Silt 0.05mm to 0.005mm And 36 – 50 Clay 0.005mm

NOTES

Classification – The Unified Soil Classification System is used to identify soil unless otherwise noted.

Standard “N” Penetration Test (SPT) (ASTM D1586) – Driving a 2-inch O.D., 1 3/8-inch I.D. sampler a distance of 1 foot into undisturbed soil with a 140-pound hammer free falling a distance of 30 inches. It is customary to drive the spoon 6-inches to seat the sampler into undisturbed soil, and then perform the test. The number of hammer blows for seating the spoon and making the tests are recorded for each 6 inches of penetration on the field drill long (e.g., 10/8/7). On the report log, the Standard Penetration Test result (i.e., the N value) is normally presented and consists of the sum of the 2nd and 3rd penetration counts (i.e., N = 8 + 7 = 15 blows/ft.)

Soil Property Symbols

Qu: Unconfined Compressive Strength N: Standard Penetration Value (see above) Qp: Unconfined Comp. Strength (pocket pent.) omc: Optimum Moisture content LL: Liquid Limit, % (Atterberg Limit) PL: Plastic Limit, % (Atterberg Limit) PI: Plasticity Index mdd: Maximum Dry Density

SPT

CRUSHED AGGREGATE (7 INCHES)

(SP-SM) FILL, mine spoil, silty SAND with sandstone floaters, brown, damp to moist, hard, micaceous weathered SANDSTONE Refusal at 3.5 feet.

Bottom of borehole at 3.5 feet.

1810-15-50 (65)

N/A

NOTES

GROUND ELEVATION 1115.7 ft

LOGGED BY Eric Owens

DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger

DRILLING CONTRACTOR Clint Ervin GROUND WATER LEVELS:

CHECKED BY Katy Bridges

DATE STARTED 9/27/22 COMPLETED 9/27/22

AT TIME OF DRILLING ---

AT END OF DRILLING ---

AFTER DRILLING ---

S A

M P

LE

T

Y P

E N

U M

B E

R

R E

C O

V E

R Y

(R

Q D

G R

A P

H

IC

LO

G

D E

P T

H (f t)

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

P

LA

S T

IC

IT

Y

IN

D E

X

P

LA

S T

IC

LI

M

IT

M O

IS

T

U R

E C

O N

T E

N T

) ATTERBERG

LIMITS

R E

M A

R K

S

B

LO

W C

O U

N T

S (N

V A

LU

E

P O

C K

E T

P E

N

(t sf

LI

Q

U

ID

LI

M

IT

B-1

CLIENT Division of Engineering & Contract Administration

PROJECT NUMBER 222-270

PROJECT NAME Whitley County Maintenance Facility

PROJECT LOCATION Whitley County, KY

G E

O T

E C

H B

H C

O

LU

M N

S

G

IN

T S

T D

U S

L A

B .G

D T

1/

1/

4:

T :\2

P

R O

JE

C

T S

\2

-2

W H

IT

LE

Y C

O S

A

LT

D O

M E

\G E

O T

E C

H \L

A B

\W H

IT

LE

Y C

O S

A

LT

D O

M E

S O

IL

S

.G P

J

ST

SPT

SPT

SPT

RC

RC

RC

RC

RC

RC

RC

RC

(0)

(0)

(0)

(0)

(0)

(20)

(46)

(78)

CRUSHED AGGREGATE (6 INCHES)

(CL) FILL, mine spoil, lean CLAY with sand and crushed aggregate, dark gray to brown, damp to moist, very stiff to medium stiff, rubbilized shale present

FILL, mine spoil, stiff

SHALE, tan to brown, silty, laminated to thin bedded, soft to moderately hard, highly weathered to decomposed, micaceous

SHALE, dark gray to black, arenaceous, laminated, soft to moderately hard, highly weathered to decomposed, containing iron oxide, micaceous, carbonaceous

SANDSTONE with shale and coal partings, light gray to gray, fine to medium grained, thin bedded, moderately hard, highly weathered, micaceous

Highly Weathered Zones: 38.5 ft to 38.6 ft

38.8 ft to 39.0 ft

SHALE with coal partings, dark gray, arenaceous, laminated, soft to moderately hard, highly weathered, micaceous SANDSTONE with shale and coal partings, light gray to gray, fine to medium grained, thin bedded, moderately hard to hard, micaceous

Crossbedded: 48.0 ft to 48.5 ft

Refusal at 11.0 feet.

Bottom of borehole at 49.0 feet.

Refused on possible mine spoil boulders

Top of Rock @

29.7 ft

Vertical Fracture

39.4 ft to

39.6 ft

Clay Seam

46.8 ft to

47.0 ft

9-9-10 (19)

2-2-5 (7)

4-3-12 (15)

3-4-5 (9)

2.25

4.75 3.25

1.5

N/A

NOTES

GROUND ELEVATION 1112.9 ft

LOGGED BY Eric Owens

DRILLING METHOD HSA/ Diamond impregnated coring bit

DRILLING CONTRACTOR Clint Ervin GROUND WATER LEVELS:

CHECKED BY Katy Bridges

DATE STARTED 9/27/22 COMPLETED 9/28/22

AT TIME OF DRILLING ---

AT END OF DRILLING ---

AFTER DRILLING ---

S A

M P

LE

T

Y P

E N

U M

B E

R

R E

C O

V E

R Y

(R

Q D

G R

A P

H

IC

LO

G

D E

P T

H (f t)

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

P

LA

S T

IC

IT

Y

IN

D E

X

P

LA

S T

IC

LI

M

IT

M O

IS

T

U R

E C

O N

T E

N T

) ATTERBERG

LIMITS

R E

M A

R K

S

B

LO

W C

O U

N T

S (N

V A

LU

E

P O

C K

E T

P E

N

(t sf

LI

Q

U

ID

LI

M

IT

B-2

CLIENT Division of Engineering & Contract Administration

PROJECT NUMBER 222-270

PROJECT NAME Whitley County Maintenance Facility

PROJECT LOCATION Whitley County, KY

G E

O T

E C

H B

H C

O

LU

M N

S

G

IN

T S

T D

U S

L A

B .G

D T

1/

1/

4:

T :\2

P

R O

JE

C

T S

\2

-2

W H

IT

LE

Y C

O S

A

LT

D O

M E

\G E

O T

E C

H \L

A B

\W H

IT

LE

Y C

O S

A

LT

D O

M E

S O

IL

S

.G

ST

SPT

SPT

SPT

SPT

CRUSHED AGGREGATE (4 INCHES)

(CL) FILL, mine spoil, lean CLAY with gravel and weathered rock, brown to dark gray, moist to wet, hard

FILL, mine spoil, rubbilized SHALE, black (GP-GM) FILL, mine spoil, silty GRAVEL, dark brown, moist to wet, medium dense to very loose

(CL) FILL, mine spoil, lean CLAY with wood debris, gray to black, moist to wet, medium stiff to hard

Refusal at 15.1 feet.

Bottom of borehole at 15.1 feet.

31-30-26 (56)

16-12-7 (19)

3-2-1 (3)

1-2-2 (4)

1-2-50 (52)

4.5

N/A 1.0

N/A

0.75

1.75

NOTES

GROUND ELEVATION 1112.8 ft

LOGGED BY Eric Owens

DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger

DRILLING CONTRACTOR Clint Ervin GROUND WATER LEVELS:

CHECKED BY Katy Bridges

DATE STARTED 9/28/22 COMPLETED 9/28/22

AT TIME OF DRILLING ---

AT END OF DRILLING ---

AFTER DRILLING ---

S A

M P

LE

T

Y P

E N

U M

B E

R

R E

C O

V E

R Y

(R

Q D

G R

A P

H

IC

LO

G

D E

P T

H (f t)

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

P

LA

S T

IC

IT

Y

IN

D E

X

P

LA

S T

IC

LI

M

IT

M O

IS

T

U R

E C

O N

T E

N T

) ATTERBERG

LIMITS

R E

M A

R K

S

B

LO

W C

O U

N T

S (N

V A

LU

E

P O

C K

E T

P E

N

(t sf

LI

Q

U

ID

LI

M

IT

B-3

CLIENT Division of Engineering & Contract Administration

PROJECT NUMBER 222-270

PROJECT NAME Whitley County Maintenance Facility

PROJECT LOCATION Whitley County, KY

G E

O T

E C

H B

H C

O

LU

M N

S

G

IN

T S

T D

U S

L A

B .G

D T

1/

1/

4:

T :\2

P

R O

JE

C

T S

\2

-2

W H

IT

LE

Y C

O S

A

LT

D O

M E

\G E

O T

E C

H \L

A B

\W H

IT

LE

Y C

O S

A

LT

D O

M E

S O

IL

S

.G

SPT

SPT

SPT

FILL, mine spoil, weathered SANDSTONE, brown to gray, damp to moist, medium dense

(CL) FILL, mine spoil, lean CLAY with sandstone floaters, brown to gray, moist to wet, very stiff

(CL) FILL, mine spoil, lean clay with concrete and construction debris, hard to very stiff

Refusal at 12.0 feet.

Bottom of borehole at 12.0 feet.

10-8-9 (17)

14-11-12 (23)

8-10-25 (35)

15-9-9 (18)

N/A

3.0

N/A

N/A

NOTES

GROUND ELEVATION 1106 ft

LOGGED BY Eric Owens

DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger

DRILLING CONTRACTOR Clint Ervin…